IR vs EQ on acoustic

[rschultz]

I'm new to IR. It's it just an EQ curve? Or is it more than that? For my acoustic through Helix setup, it seems that I just need some mild EQ. Creating my own IR seems complicated (software I don't have, etc). Am I missing something?

[guitaniac]

Originally Posted by rschultz

I'm new to IR. It's it just an EQ curve? Or is it more than that? For my acoustic through Helix setup, it seems that I just need some mild EQ. Creating my own IR seems complicated (software I don't have, etc). Am I missing something?

Its more than just EQ, as there's a timing thing going on also. Some of the sounds off the guitar reach the mic a tiny bit later oe earlier than other sounds.

However, I've discovered that ToneDexter can do a much better job of EQing out excessive lows and low mids than I can do with my trusty Zoom A3. Here are some recent comments of mine from a Tonedexter thread.


I'd like to add that ToneDexter not only trains well with old strings, it can also compensate for a problematic pickup - in some instances, at least.

I have this oddball active UST system (Shadow NanoFlex with DiMarzio preamp) which I bought off ebay a few years back. When I tried the system in one of my guitars, it proved to be very feedback prone and way too strong in the lows and low mids. I quickly replaced it with a more balanced pickup and set it aside, thinking I'd likely never get any good use from it.

Last night I needed to replace an old UST system which had developed a ground hum, and it occurred to me that ToneDexter might well compensate for the excessive lows and low mids with this NanoFlex system. I swapped in the NanoFlex system and trained up a WaveMap for it and presto - I have a noiseless and well-balanced amplified guitar sound once ToneDexter has done its thing. The difference between the pickup's muddy raw sound and the Dexterized sound is like night and day, but ToneDexter manages to pull a silk purse from a sow's ear.

[martingitdave]

Imagine a graphic EQ with about 2,000 bands, or more (up to 8,000 in some cases), of EQ. Now imagine owning a robot that would listen to your guitar amplified through a microphone and amplified through a pickup. Now, imagine that the robot instantly adjusts each band to make your pickup sound like the microphone. Then, imagine a sound engineer making some additional adjustments to make sure that new mic sound doesn't feedback when you play live. That's a very (overly simplified) explanation of IR like ToneDexter.

[jonfields45]

Originally Posted by rschultz

I'm new to IR. It's it just an EQ curve? Or is it more than that? For my acoustic through Helix setup, it seems that I just need some mild EQ. Creating my own IR seems complicated (software I don't have, etc). Am I missing something?

I think you are better off thinking of it as a very fancy, 1000+ band EQ. While it's implementation as a digital filter unavoidably includes some delay in order to manipulate low frequencies, it is really nothing like a reverb. Creating your own IR is only practical with expensive math computer aided design software, a background in electrical engineering, and way too much time on your hands. Tonedextor is an incredible bargain, not for the playback FIR filter, but for automating that filter's programming (IR generation).

[rschultz]

So if I buy one of those 3Sigma acoustic IR's, would it sound the same no matter what guitar I played it through? Or if it's just like a 1000 band EQ then it should sound different in different guitars with different pickups. Right? I mean they show an electric guitar sounding the same as an acoustic guitar using the IR. How can that be? WAY different pickup systems.

[martingitdave]

The IR has to be created with a pickup signal source and a recording. I am not sure how they do it. We have been describing the ToneDexter process, which is by far the way to go for acoustic instruments. If you happen to have a Fishman transducer in your guitar, you can also get very good results from their Aura system, which uses (essentially) the same technology. However, Fishman does all the recordings and programming in their own studio environment. Hence, the ToneDexter is attractive because it uses your actual guitar, not just another specimen of the same model.

[rschultz]

If I had an IR, I could use it with my Helix. The rub is I don't have any way to create it. I wish there was a cheaper option than a $400 Tonedexter. Maybe I could rent one from someone?

[jonfields45]

Originally Posted by rschultz

If I had an IR, I could use it with my Helix. The rub is I don't have any way to create it. I wish there was a cheaper option than a $400 Tonedexter. Maybe I could rent one from someone?

A not-a-student seat of Matlab is $150. Maybe $3000 (6 credits @ $500/credit) of tuition to know what to do with it, assuming you're starting with a STEM undergrad degree. ToneDextor is a bargain.

I'm not sure if ToneDexter SW gives you access to the IR after their proprietary SW generates it. After you rent one you'll need a test bench to measure it.

I just broke down and ordered a ToneDextor from Shorline, even though relative to most AGF participants I'm no cork sniffer.

[martingitdave]

There is no straight forward way for an amateur to make IRs that will be usable in live situations without the ToneDexter. What I have learned about the process for acoustic instruments tells me it should not be attempted by anyone except the most adept and experienced sound processing engineers. There are some IRs out there, but there is no widespread agreement that they will work well.

[guitaniac]

Originally Posted by martingitdave

The IR has to be created with a pickup signal source and a recording. I am not sure how they do it. We have been describing the ToneDexter process, which is by far the way to go for acoustic instruments. If you happen to have a Fishman transducer in your guitar, you can also get very good results from their Aura system, which uses (essentially) the same technology. However, Fishman does all the recordings and programming in their own studio environment. Hence, the ToneDexter is attractive because it uses your actual guitar, not just another specimen of the same model.

Fishman used to offer a service of creating custom sound images for a specific guitar/pickup rig. The cost was $300 plus shipping, and you had to give up the guitar for a few weeks. The best Aura results that I've heard were with my New England friend, Cormac McCarthy, using custom sound images.

I'm not even sure if Fishman still offers custom sound images, but having custom sound images created would be the Aura process which is comparable to using one's own guitar/pickup rig and mic(s) to create instrument-specific WaveMaps with ToneDexter.

[James May]

Originally Posted by jonfields45

A not-a-student seat of Matlab is $150. Maybe $3000 (6 credits @ $500/credit) of tuition to know what to do with it, assuming you're starting with a STEM undergrad degree. ToneDextor is a bargain.

I'm not sure if ToneDexter SW gives you access to the IR after their proprietary SW generates it. After you rent one you'll need a test bench to measure it.

I just broke down and ordered a ToneDextor from Shorline, even though relative to most AGF participants I'm no cork sniffer.

This made me laugh, in a good way! Sadly, the last time I checked, Matlab was $2150 + 18% a year recurring for maintenance. Or, $900/yr subscription for the base program without the signal processing toolbox.

The IRs ToneDexter creates will soon be able to be extracted and reloaded for archiving, storage, and sharing, but will be in a proprietary format.

We're glad you took the plunge on the purchase.

[rschultz]

I bought the 3sigma Martin D45 IR, installed it in my Helix. WOW. Very impressed.

[martingitdave]

Originally Posted by rschultz

I bought the 3sigma Martin D45 IR, installed it in my Helix. WOW. Very impressed.

Very cool. It’s a gateway drug. Lol

[Cuki79]

Originally Posted by jonfields45

A not-a-student seat of Matlab is $150. Maybe $3000 (6 credits @ $500/credit) of tuition to know what to do with it, assuming you're starting with a STEM undergrad degree. ToneDextor is a bargain.

I'm not sure if ToneDexter SW gives you access to the IR after their proprietary SW generates it. After you rent one you'll need a test bench to measure it.

I just broke down and ordered a ToneDextor from Shorline, even though relative to most AGF participants I'm no cork sniffer.

Well Octave and Scilab are free. Most of the basic signal processing function are there.

As education is concerned, I live in France where education is almost free. So most non-US AGF member could go the DIY way.

However, if you know nothing about signal processing I still strongly suggest to buy a Tonedexter

Note that making one decent IR that sounds good at home is not that hard... Making an algorithm that works 99.9% of the time for LIVE application like Tonedexter is a real challenge.

At the begining I did not understand why TD treated the low end and high end the way they do... This is something you understand when the IR get to be played loud and LIVE.

... There are many nice ideas in Tonedexter that come from "real-life experience" that you don't learn in a signal processing lecture.

PS: I forgot to say Tonedexter have +/-15V power supply rails which is a great feature for headroom and low noise operation. You won't get anything like that in any cheaper IR pedal host on the market.

[jonfields45]

With people gladly paying hundreds of dollars for a tube-screamer-like-device with a $5 bill of materials, it's hard to understand the questioning of ToneDextor's $400 MAP when an Aura Spectrum DI MAPs at $350 or a Line 6 Helix HX MAPs at $600.

If you already own an IR pedal that accepts commercial IRs, and you're happy with the result, then that does make sense to me. I could never get an Aura to work to my satisfaction. I'm hoping for better with a custom ToneDextor IR. I'll report back in a few weeks.